Re: U.S. Drops 'E-Bomb' On Iraqi TV
On Fri, 4 Apr 2003, Kevin S. Van Horn wrote: killed hundreds of thousands of noncombatants to get his way. The real irony is that the U.S. ended up granting the desired condition afterwards anyway. Better check your history again, McArthur made that call as supreme commander of the theatre, and got in hot water over it. -- We are all interested in the future for that is where you and I are going to spend the rest of our lives. Criswell, Plan 9 from Outer Space [EMAIL PROTECTED][EMAIL PROTECTED] www.ssz.com www.open-forge.org
Re: U.S. Drops 'E-Bomb' On Iraqi TV
On Sat, 5 Apr 2003, Thomas Shaddack wrote: I've heard that people driving through the area contaminated by Chernobyl are just told to roll up the windows and drive fast, but I don't know if that's true, or how much good it does you. Could help a little. Will prevent most of the dust getting into the car This is another example of the old question from school as to whether one gets wetter by running in a rain rather than walking. Google: Get wetter running in the rain? More of that psy-ops crap. Don't do anything about it, just make 'em feel good. What bullshit. -- We are all interested in the future for that is where you and I are going to spend the rest of our lives. Criswell, Plan 9 from Outer Space [EMAIL PROTECTED][EMAIL PROTECTED] www.ssz.com www.open-forge.org
Re: U.S. Drops 'E-Bomb' On Iraqi TV
At 10:58 PM 4/3/03 +1200, Peter Gutmann wrote: .. The Wall of Stalin: Detonate a string of dirty nukes along the Iraqi border with Kuwait/Saudi Arabia. Suddenly Dubya decides there are much better places to play soldiers, he'll look at the Iraqi thing again in 6,000 years or so. This only works if your attackers have to use the land route. Bombing and airlifting troops lets you leap right over the barrier. For that matter, I'll bet troops in modern tanks and APCs wouldn't be exposed to too much radiation in a dash across even a really dangerously radioactive zone. (Though I suppose if you're smart, you set up mines and barriers in the radioactive zone, and artillery and fortifications on its inside edge, with the goal of forcing your invaders to spend as much time as possible out there. But maintaining your fortifications inside the zone will be a serious pain!) I've heard that people driving through the area contaminated by Chernobyl are just told to roll up the windows and drive fast, but I don't know if that's true, or how much good it does you. (And there's a big difference between an acceptable level of risk to soldiers in a war, and an acceptable risk to random civilians in peacetime.) Peter. --John Kelsey, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: U.S. Drops 'E-Bomb' On Iraqi TV
Neil Johnson wrote: When your choice is 1) sending THOUSANDS of troops to their death trying invade the Japanese home islands or 2) Trying out two new, not fully reliable, not fully understood weapons that, however, if they work, will save you from doing 1). I think I know what my ethical choice a the time would have been. But there was another choice: 3) Accept a conditional surrender from the Japanese. Unfortunately, like Roosevelt before him, Truman insisted on unconditional surrender as the only thing he would accept. The Japanese were trying to negotiate a surrender, but wished to ensure that their emperor would retain his title as head of state (even if he had little actual power). Truman insisted there be no conditions whatsoever, and killed hundreds of thousands of noncombatants to get his way. The real irony is that the U.S. ended up granting the desired condition afterwards anyway.
Re: U.S. Drops 'E-Bomb' On Iraqi TV
At 01:20 PM 4/3/03 +0200, Thomas Shaddack wrote: .. [Discussing uses for the bomb that don't involve killing millions of civilians.] Or pumping of one-shot gamma lasers. (What you want to use them for is on you, though.) Weren't there some proposals for using very low-fallout bombs to break up dangerous hurricanes that were forming? (I just don't have the background in meteorology to have any intuition about whether or not this is plausible; I know hurricanes have a whole lot of energy tied up in temperature and humidity differences in different masses of air, so maybe it could work.) A lot of these struck me as desparate attempts by the bomb designers to find *something* useful to do with the damned things besides pray that they sit in their silos, rusting, and are never, never used. I guess the other side of this is maximally evil uses of bombs. Imagine someone setting up a set of fallout-enhanced bombs in their own country, with the warning that if anyone invades them, millions of people downwind will be dying of cancer in the next decade or two. Or someone trying to use current climate models to allow them to threaten a global catastrophe if they're crossed--like trying to screw up ocean currents, or setting off a bomb in the calthrate beds under the ocean to try to trigger runaway global warming. (The big problem there is that if the best available models change enough over time, as they are subject to do, your deterrent might lose all its value very quickly. And yes, I stole this idea from John Barnes.) MANY more uses. Yep. Though honestly, I think fissionables are a lot more valuable when you're using them to generate power in a mass-efficient way (e.g., bring plenty to Mars with you, so you can distill out CO2 from the atmosphere and crack out the oxygen with power from your reactor). Most of the time when you're not trying to blow something to bits, you really get more value out of continuous power output for a long time. At least, you do if you don't have to compete with cheaply available natural gas or oil, and if you don't have to comply with insanely expensive and complex regulations. --John Kelsey, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: CDR: RE: U.S. Drops 'E-Bomb' On Iraqi TV
-- On 1 Apr 2003 at 11:48, Mike Rosing wrote: Which is why MAD works. But a regular bombing run on a few oil refineries would put the US in a world of hurt really quickly, enough for them to pull a lot of their troops out of places that happen to be too close to Russia and China. Mexico isn't entirely happy with US policy, I'm sure they could be bribed into letting the other powers use their air and land space for a limited attack. The US won't use nukes to retaliate, which was the origin of this line of argument. This US will not retaliate argument seems insane. Maybe the US would not use nukes, but whatever it did use, everyone in the political apparatus of Mexico would be dead, and and some impressive bits of China and or Russia would be in flames. The US, like every other organization and bunch of people, will respond if attacked. What do you expect?Its in our genes, since we were worms in the precambrian mud. --digsig James A. Donald 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG h36DwI5e5vKElHg28/4q4kfgUVDbydGrPgeZEKTW 4yX4xozKZVtShKVVoYTUKqhgLxnvl1fTT1cTOFgzC
Re: CDR: RE: U.S. Drops 'E-Bomb' On Iraqi TV
-- On 1 Apr 2003 at 11:48, Mike Rosing wrote: Which is why MAD works. But a regular bombing run on a few oil refineries would put the US in a world of hurt really quickly, enough for them to pull a lot of their troops out of places that happen to be too close to Russia and China. Mexico isn't entirely happy with US policy, I'm sure they could be bribed into letting the other powers use their air and land space for a limited attack. The US won't use nukes to retaliate, which was the origin of this line of argument. If Russia, Chaina and the EU really wanted to, they could use conventional weapons and force the US to at least retreat from trying to rule the world. This supposes the US is trying to rule the world, which is not apparent -- at least not to the US. An attack on the US to stop it from trying to rule the world would be perceived as a plain and simple attack, and would provoke a corresponding response. If Russia bombs a US oil refinery with Mexican cooperation, the existing government in Mexico would wind up dead real fast, and some Russian ports would be in flames. --digsig James A. Donald 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG baElAcTaVUiywf1LQXHkD3jjIL8tQmV8kXdn5eLe 4rHHMsZMLVskeVboCdgyhZ3sBET3r8d2Yi8x1eHS6
Re: U.S. Drops 'E-Bomb' On Iraqi TV
Damian Gerow wrote: I can only see two reasons for bombing with nuclear weapons: hate and stupidity. That being said, you'd have to *really* hate someone (or an entire country) to actually /use/ a nuclear weapon. That's nonsense. I can think of several entirely ethical uses of nuclear weapons, with the usage not motivated by hate but simple utility: 1. You have a large invading fleet approaching your nation. A few nukes out in the middle of the ocean could handily take out the fleet without getting any innocent bystanders. (This scenario occurs in one of Poul Anderson's novels.) 2. You have a large invading army crossing an uninhabited wasteland. Again, tactical nukes would be useful and ethical here. Use airbursts, though, to avoid producing a lot of fallout. 3. Power generation. One scheme I once read about for a fusion reactor involved digging a deep cavern, exploding a nuke within it every once in a while, and having the resulting heat drive your electrical generators. 4. Interplanetary transportation of a massive payload. Project Orion, anyone?
Re: CDR: RE: U.S. Drops 'E-Bomb' On Iraqi TV
If Russia, Chaina and the EU really wanted to, they could use conventional weapons and force the US to at least retreat from trying to rule the world. This supposes the US is trying to rule the world, which is not apparent -- at least not to the US. I am afraid it's more than just apparent. I personally am not exactly comfortable with the idea of a wannabe world ruler, especially with Bushites in charge. Forwarded message follows: - Subject: [gulfwar-2] FYI: the New American Century From: Ben McGinnes [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Hello, Some here may have already seen articles in various news papers and agencies about a U.S. think tank called the Project for the New American Century (PNAC). Specifically regarding a report drafted by that group which promotes the benefit to the world of American military supremacy. Most of the news articles only cite the original article by the Irish Sunday Herald: http://www.sundayherald.com/print27735 This article is dated September 15th, last year and is somewhat sparse in details of the report. Those interested in seeing the report, which given its origin and the who members of PNAC are, can obtain the PDF from the PNAC website: http://www.newamericancentury.org/RebuildingAmericasDefenses.pdf There is a HTML copy available here: http://cryptome.org/rad.htm It makes for very interesting reading, especially given the number of members of both the current and previous Bush Administrations involved with PNAC. Regards, Ben
Re: U.S. Drops 'E-Bomb' On Iraqi TV
4. Interplanetary transportation of a massive payload. Project Orion, anyone? Don't forget a more realistic scenario: an asteroid on a collision course. Another use can be quick construction of large underground storage tanks for gas or oil. Or extracting the rest of oil from almost empty oil bed. The heat and pressure wave will crush the porous rock, forcing the oil out. (I am not sure if I quote it right, WAY too many years ago I read it in some popular-science book.) Or large-scale planetary construction works. (The meek shall inherit the Earth - the others aim for the stars.) Or pumping of one-shot gamma lasers. (What you want to use them for is on you, though.) MANY more uses.
Re: CDR: RE: U.S. Drops 'E-Bomb' On Iraqi TV
On Wed, 2 Apr 2003, Damian Gerow wrote: The list can go on and on. The US is *not* a popular country right now. Not only could I see Mexico turning a blind eye, but I can see a large part of the world taking the same stance. I agree wholeheartedly with what you're saying. The US, I'd like to believe, isn't dumb enough to actually use its nuclear weapons, especially on its own continent. Move across the ocean, and I'm less sure of this, though. Like Harmon said, the world is already boycotting US production of food, it wouldn't take much to boycott everything. But if a few attacks here and there take place, I don't think anyone in the world is going to cry for the US. I'd rather see the Green party (and Russian) attempts at having George W. Bush indicted as a War Criminal for this attack on Iraq. Much more peaceful, delivers a much stronger message, and rids the guy of his power trip. I was just daydreaming about this whild doging cars on my bicycle this morning. It would be cool to see Bush in the Hague! Patience, persistence, truth, Dr. mike
Re: Nuking kasmir (Re: U.S. Drops 'E-Bomb' On Iraqi TV)
helo, Hilarious, dude. Who got nukes first? India. Nope US did. India got after US and before pakistan.Pak claims to have nukes since 1983,though they were tested only in 1999-his report comes frm pakistan. See your own propoganda site, US is not the only counrty who can do that :-) We are tired of watching CNN and BBC.Even local news papers do carry more truth of whats happening around the world. http://www.saag.org/papers5/paper451.html THE MAY 1998 POKHRAN TESTS: Scientific Aspects by R. Chidambaram for a nice tech description of your past and recent gizmos. And your blackmailing agitprop is taken straight from http://www.saag.org/papers5/paper482.html PAKISTAN'S NUCLEAR BLACKMAILING: Spreading fear of nuclear terror by Dr. Rajesh Kumar Mishra (which is a typical paper topic by South Asia Analysis Group, which seems to be an Indian 1960's RAND). More than propaganda-they pubicly claimed that nukes are not made to be kept on the shelves.Any way there is nothing much any body can do about it-be it india or pak or US or Russia.India also has a self imposed moretarium of no first use of nukes. US conducted nearly a thousand nuclear tests over the years and imposed sanctions on india and pak for testing nukes.Every one does have a propaganda whether the US likes it or not and US is not the only country who can do what they like :-). Regards Sarath. Yahoo! Tax Center - File online, calculators, forms, and more http://tax.yahoo.com
RE: U.S. Drops 'E-Bomb' On Iraqi TV
The suicide bombers will come here entirely on their own for the most part, or perhaps with the help of Al-queda type groups. There will be no country to retaliate against. That alone could easily send us into a But that wouldn't be a good escape for a govt: mind your pawns (er, citizens) or we'll whack you. The US (and a lot of countries I'm sure) would see this as a good opportunity to target countries where bombers come from, whether or not they are govt approved or govt created. If they are, the reaction would be military. If they are not, the reaction would be more covert, with a part of political pressure for laws which follow what the US do at home, and more, due to the absence of the constitution and US negative public opinion. Or do you mean that the CIA will seek to undermine the governments of countries that boycott the US? It might not even be a gov't Undermine, and more. The CIA has a lot of practice with that, changing govts for one more palatable to the US foreign policy. Even without getting there, appropriate pressure on an existing govt can go a long way to make a country's policy more helpful. And, if done well, without the backlash provoked by military intervention. -- Vincent Penquerc'h
RE: U.S. Drops 'E-Bomb' On Iraqi TV
Right, we won't use nukes, we'll just use 'depleted' uranium core artillery, thermobaric bunker busters (aka mini-nukes), daisy cutters and MOABS; After all, those aren't weapons of mass destruction. --Kaos-Keraunos-Kybernetos--- + ^ + :NSA got $20Bil/year |Passwords are like underwear. You don't /|\ \|/ :and didn't stop 9-11|share them, you don't hang them on your/\|/\ --*--:Instead of rewarding|monitor, or under your keyboard, you \/|\/ /|\ :their failures, we |don't email them, or put them on a web \|/ + v + :should get refunds! |site, and you must change them very often. [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.sunder.net On Wed, 2 Apr 2003, James A. Donald wrote: This US will not retaliate argument seems insane. Maybe the US would not use nukes, but whatever it did use, everyone in the political apparatus of Mexico would be dead, and and some impressive bits of China and or Russia would be in flames.
Re: U.S. Drops 'E-Bomb' On Iraqi TV
Kevin S. Van Horn [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I can think of several entirely ethical uses of nuclear weapons, with the usage not motivated by hate but simple utility: 1. You have a large invading fleet approaching your nation. A few nukes out in the middle of the ocean could handily take out the fleet without getting any innocent bystanders. (This scenario occurs in one of Poul Anderson's novels.) 2. You have a large invading army crossing an uninhabited wasteland. Again, tactical nukes would be useful and ethical here. Use airbursts, though, to avoid producing a lot of fallout. The Wall of Stalin: Detonate a string of dirty nukes along the Iraqi border with Kuwait/Saudi Arabia. Suddenly Dubya decides there are much better places to play soldiers, he'll look at the Iraqi thing again in 6,000 years or so. Peter.
RE: Nuking kasmir (Re: U.S. Drops 'E-Bomb' On Iraqi TV)
Sarad AV[SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: helo, Hilarious, dude. Who got nukes first? India. Nope US did. India got after US and before pakistan.Pak claims to have nukes since 1983,though they were tested only in 1999-his report comes frm pakistan. For those to young to remember, India detonated it's first nuclear device way back in May 1974. Check out http://nuketesting.enviroweb.org/hew/India/IndiaFirstBomb.html which has a remarkably detailed description of the gadget. Peter Trei
Re: U.S. Drops 'E-Bomb' On Iraqi TV
hi, yes-thats probabaly why they nuked hirsoshima and nagasaki. Dont undermine the hate.There was no logic either.There was no logic in nuking thousand of people in hirsohma saying their existance is less important to thousands of people who might live,if the city was nuked. Sarath.
Re: U.S. Drops 'E-Bomb' On Iraqi TV
hi, Why are the suicide bombers after US troops-its the hate.It does work .Yesterday at najaf(iraq)-a family of 8 women and atleast 2 children were killed by allied troops.They claimed that the vehicle sped towards an allied check post.So they fired warning shots to *stop* the vehicle. When it didn't stop-they opened fire at the passenger compartment.Then they figured out they were a family(iraqi civilains fleeing).One of the women was still hodling the bodies of 2 children and she refused to step out.The allied troops maintained that they had the right defend themself at check posts and any where. They said that they would have to be careful of suicide bombers. When a vehicle tries to flee at high speed-how can they be suicide bombers.A suicide bomber will go slow,stop at the check post and see that he can kill as many people as possible. where was the logic in killing these civilians-and this report was confirmed by allied soldiers. For those who read this-the hate is growing,all over the world. Silly PC language about how when the hate grows logic doesn't work is pointless, Ghandian nonsense. If India does not withdraw from Kashmir, Pakistan will nuke Delhi, Calcutta, Hyderabad, and the aptly-named Mumbai. Thats part of the hate-you are condradicting. Jibberish about hate and love and violence never solves anything needs to be introduced to Mr. Atom. --Tim May As long as the US thinks it can flex its muscles-the going gets bad.The sooner it realises the better it is for its citizens. Sarath. __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Tax Center - File online, calculators, forms, and more http://tax.yahoo.com
Re: CDR: RE: U.S. Drops 'E-Bomb' On Iraqi TV
After reading this, I feel like I missed something in my original post... Mike Rosing [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: And then the whole world dies, because of ... what? Natural stupidity. grin Spot on. Which is why MAD works. But a regular bombing run on a few oil refineries would put the US in a world of hurt really quickly, enough for them to pull a lot of their troops out of places that happen to be too close to Russia and China. Mexico isn't entirely happy with US policy, I'm sure they could be bribed into letting the other powers use their air and land space for a limited attack. The US won't use nukes to retaliate, which was the origin of this line of argument. ... Mexico's not happy, Canadians are getting pissed because of threatened boycotts from American companies/PIRs, Europeans are pissed because America has threatened to boycott perfume and cheese (yes, this is mostly France, but they /are/ a part of the EU), Iraq is pissed because they just got invaded, Korea's pissed because the US is jerking them around ... The list can go on and on. The US is *not* a popular country right now. Not only could I see Mexico turning a blind eye, but I can see a large part of the world taking the same stance. I agree wholeheartedly with what you're saying. The US, I'd like to believe, isn't dumb enough to actually use its nuclear weapons, especially on its own continent. Move across the ocean, and I'm less sure of this, though. If Russia, Chaina and the EU really wanted to, they could use conventional weapons and force the US to at least retreat from trying to rule the world. An attack on Syria and Saudi Arabia or Iran could provoke it. I'd rather see the Green party (and Russian) attempts at having George W. Bush indicted as a War Criminal for this attack on Iraq. Much more peaceful, delivers a much stronger message, and rids the guy of his power trip.
Nuking kasmir (Re: U.S. Drops 'E-Bomb' On Iraqi TV)
At 10:43 PM 4/1/03 -0800, Sarad AV wrote: Well-pakistan has been constantly nuclear black mailing india.They say that their nuclear options are always open and there is nothing india can do about it. Sarath. Hilarious, dude. Who got nukes first? India. See your own propoganda site, http://www.saag.org/papers5/paper451.html THE MAY 1998 POKHRAN TESTS: Scientific Aspects by R. Chidambaram for a nice tech description of your past and recent gizmos. And your blackmailing agitprop is taken straight from http://www.saag.org/papers5/paper482.html PAKISTAN'S NUCLEAR BLACKMAILING: Spreading fear of nuclear terror by Dr. Rajesh Kumar Mishra (which is a typical paper topic by South Asia Analysis Group, which seems to be an Indian 1960's RAND).
Re: U.S. Drops 'E-Bomb' On Iraqi TV
On Wed, 2 Apr 2003, Ken Brown wrote: On paper they won on the Eastern Front, but the Soviet Union was produced out of the Russian defeat and I suspect many Germans would, in the log run, not have thought that that was a good outcome. One really can't deny that that shipping the secret weapon of mass destruction (Ulyanov-1 across Germany in a sealed railway car) produced a lot of fallout.
Re: U.S. Drops 'E-Bomb' On Iraqi TV
On Tuesday, April 1, 2003, at 10:43 PM, Sarad AV wrote: --- Damian Gerow [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: And then the whole world dies, because of ... what? Seriously, I *highly* doubt that any nation at this time would *seriously* think of bombing another nuclear-enabled nation with a nuclear weapon. It's just suicide. Well-pakistan has been constantly nuclear black mailing india.They say that their nuclear options are always open and there is nothing india can do about it.When the hate grows logic doesn't work. Silly PC language about how when the hate grows logic doesn't work is pointless, Ghandian nonsense. If India does not withdraw from Kashmir, Pakistan will nuke Delhi, Calcutta, Hyderabad, and the aptly-named Mumbai. Jibberish about hate and love and violence never solves anything needs to be introduced to Mr. Atom. --Tim May The Constitution is a radical document...it is the job of the government to rein in people's rights. --President William J. Clinton
Re: U.S. Drops 'E-Bomb' On Iraqi TV
On Wed, Apr 02, 2003 at 12:16:20PM +0100, Vincent Penquerc'h wrote: I don't think they will need to fight us, just impose sanctions by the UN, or even just a world boycott of the US. That and a few suicide bombers in the US now and again. How many suicide bombers in airports would it take to finish off the US air industry? The rest of the world is perfectly capable of destroying the US without any real military action. I doubt those govts would be able to hide their traces well enough for the CIA not to have wind of this. Then, the US have two options: either officially yell, and maybe militarily attack (they'd have a huge popular support for this), or let the CIA do the thing, as in Chile, for instance. Leads to a war of civilian bombings ? Official yells would be of course accompanied with sanctions, probably voted at UNSC unanimity (minus a veto if the responsbile country is in UNSC itself, but I doubt that'd change much anyway). Something that could (though not very probable either) avoid these consequences is unofficial actions, by people without any state connection whatsoever (or company, etc). But even then, look at what happened to Afghanistan. Granted, a EU country might be a bit more hard of a target to attack, but it would be easier for the CIA to do the same kind of covert attacks there. I doubt many countries want to get involved into that. The suicide bombers will come here entirely on their own for the most part, or perhaps with the help of Al-queda type groups. There will be no country to retaliate against. That alone could easily send us into a deep depression -- by and large the US public is far too soft to deal with the effects of that. Or do you mean that the CIA will seek to undermine the governments of countries that boycott the US? It might not even be a gov't action, just a lot of angry people around the world. After all, what do we produce that anyone really needs that isn't made more cheaply elsewhere, other than possibly food? And many countries are already boycotting our GM food crops. -- Harmon Seaver CyberShamanix http://www.cybershamanix.com
Re: U.S. Drops 'E-Bomb' On Iraqi TV
at Tuesday, April 01, 2003 11:53 PM, Kevin S. Van Horn [EMAIL PROTECTED] was seen to say: What's a legitimate government? One with enough firepower to make its rule stick? One with real (not imagined) WMD to frighten off american presidents. NK being a good example...
Re: U.S. Drops 'E-Bomb' On Iraqi TV
Kevin S. Van Horn wrote: the side contributing the most corpses won. True of Vietnam of course. And of WW2, the dead being mainly in Eastern Europe and China. Arguably of WW1 as well, the Germans lost fewer men on the Western Front than the Belgians, French and British, but they had more deaths from disease. On paper they won on the Eastern Front, but the Soviet Union was produced out of the Russian defeat and I suspect many Germans would, in the log run, not have thought that that was a good outcome.
Re: CDR: RE: U.S. Drops 'E-Bomb' On Iraqi TV
--- Damian Gerow [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: And then the whole world dies, because of ... what? Seriously, I *highly* doubt that any nation at this time would *seriously* think of bombing another nuclear-enabled nation with a nuclear weapon. It's just suicide. Well-pakistan has been constantly nuclear black mailing india.They say that their nuclear options are always open and there is nothing india can do about it.When the hate grows logic doesn't work.Thats why one cannot do any thing about suicide bombing either.There are no winners in a nuclear war-thats certain.So the uneasy peace will prevail for a few more year.Things may change later. Sarath. 'a couple thousand nukes' later, there's not much left of this planet. That which hasn't been blowed [sic] up is exposed to enough radiation to kill, or to cause some serious mutations. __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Tax Center - File online, calculators, forms, and more http://tax.yahoo.com
Re: CDR: RE: U.S. Drops 'E-Bomb' On Iraqi TV
Sarad AV [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Seriously, I *highly* doubt that any nation at this time would *seriously* think of bombing another nuclear-enabled nation with a nuclear weapon. It's just suicide. Well-pakistan has been constantly nuclear black mailing india.They say that their nuclear options are always open and there is nothing india can do about it.When the hate grows logic doesn't work.Thats why one cannot do any thing about suicide bombing either.There are no winners in a nuclear war-thats certain.So the uneasy peace will prevail for a few more year.Things may change later. You're leaving out stupidity. I can only see two reasons for bombing with nuclear weapons: hate and stupidity. That being said, you'd have to *really* hate someone (or an entire country) to actually /use/ a nuclear weapon. Threatening is one thing. Doing is another.
RE: U.S. Drops 'E-Bomb' On Iraqi TV
Kelsey[SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED] How ever I wonder if the report of an Apache helicopter being shot down by a farmer with his rifle-the chopper was certainly downed but I find it hard to beleive that a bullet brought it down. I heard (I think on BBC) that a whole bunch of the choppers we sent out on some mission came back so shot up they were basically unsalvageable. It sounded like they'd been hit with small arms fire, but I don't know enough about the different kinds of helicopters used (I think these were Apaches) to know if that's plausible. Anti-aircraft artillery, SAMs, or those Russian 20mm anti-aircraft machine guns might have done the damage. Or maybe they really were messed up badly by hundreds of rounds of 7.62 mm, but it sure seems like it would be unhealthy to be one of the people shooting at the helicopters in that situation--like a bunch of people shooting at a lion with .22 pistols or something. Even if you eventually drive the helicopter off, it's going to leave a big pile of bodies behind! I recently read a military report (I wish I kept the URL) about small arms fire vs low-flying aircraft. The upshot is that it's a lot more effective than you expect, if you have enough guns and the sense to coordinate them to create a 'wall of lead' in the area the aircraft is about to fly through. I expect that a helicopter hovering low over a city is pretty damn vulnerable. Peter Trei
RE: U.S. Drops 'E-Bomb' On Iraqi TV
At 12:43 PM 3/29/2003 -0800, Mike Rosing wrote: I totally agree. The US has lost everything in terms of world opinion. We are morons led by an insane lunatic and the US needs to be dealt with accordingly. Once we start invading Syria, the world will retaliate in a big way. We're already building excuses to do so, so I won't be supprised if the US accidentally bombs a few targets inside Syria. Washington are very capable of doing something really stupid and I don't think they appreciate how much military power can be brought to bear against them. If it stays in Iraq, the US has a chance. If they decide to make it bigger, the US will be toast. So when the rest of the world retaliates with all their military power that the US fails to appreciate, what strategic war plan does the rest of the world have for handling a couple thousand nukes? Just trying to figure their options? DCF
Re: CDR: RE: U.S. Drops 'E-Bomb' On Iraqi TV
On Tue, 1 Apr 2003, Damian Gerow wrote: And then the whole world dies, because of ... what? Natural stupidity. Seriously, I *highly* doubt that any nation at this time would *seriously* think of bombing another nuclear-enabled nation with a nuclear weapon. It's just suicide. 'a couple thousand nukes' later, there's not much left of this planet. That which hasn't been blowed [sic] up is exposed to enough radiation to kill, or to cause some serious mutations. Which is why MAD works. But a regular bombing run on a few oil refineries would put the US in a world of hurt really quickly, enough for them to pull a lot of their troops out of places that happen to be too close to Russia and China. Mexico isn't entirely happy with US policy, I'm sure they could be bribed into letting the other powers use their air and land space for a limited attack. The US won't use nukes to retaliate, which was the origin of this line of argument. If Russia, Chaina and the EU really wanted to, they could use conventional weapons and force the US to at least retreat from trying to rule the world. An attack on Syria and Saudi Arabia or Iran could provoke it. I don't think it's very likely to happen, but if the US really tries to attack more countries with the same blatent lies they used on Iraq, I wouldn't be supprised either. Patience, persistence, truth, Dr. mike
Re: CDR: RE: U.S. Drops 'E-Bomb' On Iraqi TV
Mike Rosing [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So when the rest of the world retaliates with all their military power that the US fails to appreciate, what strategic war plan does the rest of the world have for handling a couple thousand nukes? Just trying to figure their options? Russia, China and, France all have nukes and delivery capability. If the US wants to retaliate with nukes, they'll get nuked in return. MAD works. And then the whole world dies, because of ... what? Seriously, I *highly* doubt that any nation at this time would *seriously* think of bombing another nuclear-enabled nation with a nuclear weapon. It's just suicide. 'a couple thousand nukes' later, there's not much left of this planet. That which hasn't been blowed [sic] up is exposed to enough radiation to kill, or to cause some serious mutations.
Re: U.S. Drops 'E-Bomb' On Iraqi TV
John Kelsey wrote: I think there was some complicated argument about the Taliban not being a legitimate government, What's a legitimate government? One with enough firepower to make its rule stick?
Re: U.S. Drops 'E-Bomb' On Iraqi TV
I don't think they will need to fight us, just impose sanctions by the UN, or even just a world boycott of the US. That and a few suicide bombers in the US now and again. How many suicide bombers in airports would it take to finish off the US air industry? The rest of the world is perfectly capable of destroying the US without any real military action. On Tue, Apr 01, 2003 at 06:10:02AM -0800, Mike Rosing wrote: On Mon, 31 Mar 2003, Duncan Frissell wrote: So when the rest of the world retaliates with all their military power that the US fails to appreciate, what strategic war plan does the rest of the world have for handling a couple thousand nukes? Just trying to figure their options? Russia, China and, France all have nukes and delivery capability. If the US wants to retaliate with nukes, they'll get nuked in return. MAD works. Patience, persistence, truth, Dr. mike -- Harmon Seaver CyberShamanix http://www.cybershamanix.com
RE: U.S. Drops 'E-Bomb' On Iraqi TV
On Mon, 31 Mar 2003, Duncan Frissell wrote: So when the rest of the world retaliates with all their military power that the US fails to appreciate, what strategic war plan does the rest of the world have for handling a couple thousand nukes? Just trying to figure their options? Russia, China and, France all have nukes and delivery capability. If the US wants to retaliate with nukes, they'll get nuked in return. MAD works. Patience, persistence, truth, Dr. mike
RE: U.S. Drops 'E-Bomb' On Iraqi TV
On Sat, 29 Mar 2003, Sarad AV wrote: The images shown at the begining of the war showing iraqi soldiers surrending and walking up with their hands behind their head might have cost US dear again. Iraqi tv then showed a iraqi general with a large rifle in his hand saying to iraqi tv-what do you think when I have this (rifle) in my hand,i wont die without killing two of them. So why is the US complaining about their troops on the air? After the war started around 3 civilians have joined the war as small unorganised groups. On invasion of your homeland is different than pushing you out of someone else's home. I don't think the US figured that one out. If the war drags to mid april the US troops wont stand the intense heat,i mean its going to hard for them. They are tough. But if the Iraqi's are saving their bug spray for summer, then the US troops won't be moving too fast for sure. properly. (There's also world opinion, which we care about a lot more than Iraq does.) I wont beleive that any more-the US doesn't listen any more to the world,its gone blind and deaf. I totally agree. The US has lost everything in terms of world opinion. We are morons led by an insane lunatic and the US needs to be dealt with accordingly. Once we start invading Syria, the world will retaliate in a big way. We're already building excuses to do so, so I won't be supprised if the US accidentally bombs a few targets inside Syria. Suspected al-queda/taliban prisoners were put in 6*8 meter cages in the open sun and badly beaten up-I remember seeing that on tv.They weren't given pow status either.May be they didn't look like humans :) Which is how the rest of the world will treat US POW's from now on too. I bet the weekend warriors weren't betting on that! hopefully they are treated well as its no fault of theirs that they are dragged into this war with iraq. You gotta use pawns when you have them. The US is streatched really thin now. A major attack on it's interests in South America would prove difficult to defend. Same with Korea and Taiwan. The nut cases in Washington are very capable of doing something really stupid and I don't think they appreciate how much military power can be brought to bear against them. If it stays in Iraq, the US has a chance. If they decide to make it bigger, the US will be toast. C'est la vie, n'est pas? Patience, persistence, truth, Dr. mike
RE: U.S. Drops 'E-Bomb' On Iraqi TV
At 01:57 AM 3/28/03 -0800, Sarad AV wrote: ... They are finding it hard to hit armoured vehicles since they are well spread out in distinct patterns.US has told iraq to treat US soldiers as pow's and follow the geneva convention.they showed images of 3 US pow's,one women and 2 men-one of them were bandaged on their head.These had appeared a few hours after US made a press conference saying that they had taken 3000 iraqi's pow's and there were no US pow's. Yep. This led to complaints about showing POWs on TV violating the Geneva convention. For some reason, when CNN showed Iraqi POWs, we didn't notice a problem. (At some level, I think the projections of the people at the top were so optimistic, that a lot of people were just shocked that the Iraqis didn't just collapse and welcome the soldiers into Baghdad with flowers and cheering. This has a really depressing parallel with the way we jumped intp Vietnam, though I don't think the Iraqi soldiers are anywhere near as tough and committed as the NVA.) Iraq replied by asking them to follow the geneva convention and not to do cluster bombing in civilan areas. Be fair about this. We own the skies above Baghdad, at least above the range of small-arms fire. If we wanted the streets of Baghdad choked with corpses, they would be. Basically, civilian casualties have been the result of a small number of bombs missing targets, or screwed up targeting, or bystanders getting hit when they're too close to what looks like a miliatary target. I think we've probably played up our bombing accuracy a bit too much, but it's not like we're targeting civilian areas. If we were, the images from Baghdad would be very different; not just one market with a bomb crater, and one hospital flooded with injured and dead people, but every building reduced to smoldering ruins, and dead people so thick on the ground you couldn't walk across it. In any case US military pow's are going to have a hard time and since U.S didnot give pow status to *suspected* Al-Queda/taliban militants captured in afghan war-no body is going to put pressure on iraq either. Well, there's not a whole lot more pressure we can put on the top leadership of Iraq, since our public pronouncements have made clear that Saddam, his kids, and presumably most of the rest of the top echelon of Iraqi leadership is going to be jailed or executed when this is all done. I guess specific generals may have an incentive to treat US POWs better, since the issue will likely come up when the US takes over Iraq in another month or two. I think the usual inducement to treating POWs you hold properly is that you want your soldiers who've been taken prisoner to be treated properly. (There's also world opinion, which we care about a lot more than Iraq does.) I'm not sure how important the Iraqi government considers our treatment of their captured soldiers, though, and we're not going to shoot them all even if the Iraqis do that to our captured soldiers. Regards Sarath. --John Kelsey, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: U.S. Drops 'E-Bomb' On Iraqi TV
helo, --- John Kelsey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Be fair about this. We own the skies above Baghdad, bit too much, but it's not like we're targeting civilian areas. If we were, the images from Baghdad would be very different; not just one market with a bomb crater, and one hospital flooded with injured and dead people, but every building reduced to smoldering ruins, and dead people so thick on the ground you couldn't walk across it. Except for 'smart bombs' which has an accuracy 95% and the only bombings shown on TV-what about the rest.Even the patriot missles has a success hit rate of 1 out of 3.Is true that iraqi's are putting anti air craft and other light arms over civilian buildings-that should be the reason they got hit. How ever I wonder if the report of an Apache helicopter being shot down by a farmer with his rifle-the chopper was certainly downed but I find it hard to beleive that a bullet brought it down. The images shown at the begining of the war showing iraqi soldiers surrending and walking up with their hands behind their head might have cost US dear again. Iraqi tv then showed a iraqi general with a large rifle in his hand saying to iraqi tv-what do you think when I have this (rifle) in my hand,i wont die without killing two of them. After the war started around 3 civilians have joined the war as small unorganised groups. If the war drags to mid april the US troops wont stand the intense heat,i mean its going to hard for them. I think the usual inducement to treating POWs you hold properly is that you want your soldiers who've been taken prisoner to be treated properly. (There's also world opinion, which we care about a lot more than Iraq does.) I wont beleive that any more-the US doesn't listen any more to the world,its gone blind and deaf. Suspected al-queda/taliban prisoners were put in 6*8 meter cages in the open sun and badly beaten up-I remember seeing that on tv.They weren't given pow status either.May be they didn't look like humans :) I'm not sure how important the Iraqi government considers our treatment of their captured soldiers, though, and we're not going to shoot them all even if the Iraqis do that to our captured soldiers. hopefully they are treated well as its no fault of theirs that they are dragged into this war with iraq. Regards Sarath. --John Kelsey, [EMAIL PROTECTED] __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Platinum - Watch CBS' NCAA March Madness, live on your desktop! http://platinum.yahoo.com
RE: U.S. Drops 'E-Bomb' On Iraqi TV
hi, All this happening on the worlds greatest demcoracy. may be you read this news. http://news.yahoo.com/fc?tmpl=fccid=34in=techcat=hackers_and_crackers Unofficial reports are that 500 iraqi's died 2 days ago and day before yesterday another 1000 died.This is the word comming from Saudi-from friends.Dunno if the casualities are iraqi civilains or the army. US bombers are any way doing cluster bombing in civilian areas.They are finding it hard to hit armoured vehicles since they are well spread out in distinct patterns.US has told iraq to treat US soldiers as pow's and follow the geneva convention.they showed images of 3 US pow's,one women and 2 men-one of them were bandaged on their head.These had appeared a few hours after US made a press conference saying that they had taken 3000 iraqi's pow's and there were no US pow's. Iraq replied by asking them to follow the geneva convention and not to do cluster bombing in civilan areas. In any case US military pow's are going to have a hard time and since U.S didnot give pow status to *suspected* Al-Queda/taliban militants captured in afghan war-no body is going to put pressure on iraq either. Regards Sarath. --- Mike Rosing [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thu, 27 Mar 2003, Vincent Penquerc'h wrote: Yup, I get it from the UK, though I didn't get it two and three days ago. URLs are all in English, though this may be normal. BTW, does anyone know about www.aljezeerah.info ? I've been getting my news from there since the start of the war, but I don't know what links it has with, say, www.aljazeera.net, since I never got there before. It's all in English, but I'm not sure about the actual affiliation and editorial line, if anyone can shed some light. It's definitly jammed in the US. I get 503 - out of resources error. Maybe you guys can set up a mirror that isn't jammed and the US can see it that way (at least until the feds catch wind of it). Patience, persistence, truth, Dr. mike __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Platinum - Watch CBS' NCAA March Madness, live on your desktop! http://platinum.yahoo.com
Re: U.S. Drops 'E-Bomb' On Iraqi TV
it is around 1130, local time, Geneva, Switzerland and http://www.aljazeera.net/ is working just fine. (well, it might be a fake, but not having ever seen the original, I don't know)
Al-Jazeera website [was: Re: U.S. Drops 'E-Bomb' On Iraqi TV]
'Gabriel Rocha' wrote: it is around 1130, local time, Geneva, Switzerland and http://www.aljazeera.net/ is working just fine. (well, it might be a fake, but not having ever seen the original, I don't know) It looks like over here in Europe we're getting DNS to aljazeera.net pointing to a French site. I don't know if that would have been the case a few days ago. http://www.cursor.org/aljazeera.htm has pointers to news items claiming that: Launch of English website delayed until mid-April Doha - Waves of spam kept Al-Jazeera's website down for a third day on Thursday and officials at the satellite channel said it was coming from US e- mailers apparently angry over its coverage of the Iraqi war. The Qatar-based network, which has broadcast graphic footage of dead US and British soldiers, also said it would now have to delay the introduction of an English-language site for several weeks due to the barrage of spam, or junk electronic mail. English.aljazeera.net will not be launched until mid-April, online editor-in-chief Abdel Aziz Al-Mahmud told AFP. Which, if true (could be COW-a-ganda) means AJ are victims of successful DoS. Maybe someone should tell them about Spam Assassin. aljazeera.com.qa gives me 64.70.250.49 which ARIN assign to cybergate in Florida. Last stages of traceroute are: Nuts! That has a website pointing to Al-Jazeera Islamic Bank For all I know Al-Jazeera may be the Qatari equivalent of Acme and Ace in Roadrunner cartoons. Default corporate brand name.
Re: U.S. Drops 'E-Bomb' On Iraqi TV
On Thu, Mar 27, at 01:12PM, Sunder wrote: The site was defaced last I saw it, I would suspect that to still be the case, or it is down for other reasons (overloaded, etc...) For those of you who are getting a dotster page, try using a different dns server than what your isp is giving you. It may not be 'jammed' from the US, but if ISPs want to use an easy way to stop average users from going there, they can just make their dns servers give false answers, which would explain what you're getting. From Switzerland: [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ traceroute -I www.aljazeera.net traceroute to aljazeera.net (213.30.180.219), 30 hops max, 38 byte packets 1 193.247.37.1 (193.247.37.1) 1.695 ms 1.531 ms 1.530 ms 2 i68ges-021-Serial4-4.ip-plus.net (164.128.74.85) 3.840 ms 3.741 ms 3.688 ms 3 i68ges-000-FastEthernet1-0.ip-plus.net (164.128.76.33) 3.714 ms 10.697 ms 3.661 ms 4 i68ges-005-fas2-2.ip-plus.net (164.128.35.73) 3.683 ms 3.701 ms 6.341 ms 5 UTA-Innsbruck.ip-plus.net (164.128.34.42) 14.780 ms 18.669 ms 14.908 ms 6 completel.sfinx.tm.fr (194.68.129.188) 16.237 ms 16.561 ms 15.889 ms 7 pos9-0-0.bbr1.ntr.completel.fr (213.244.1.226) 261.116 ms 18.268 ms 20.955 ms 8 213.30.128.94 (213.30.128.94) 44.155 ms 49.592 ms 43.292 ms 9 * * * From Massachussetts: [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ traceroute -I www.aljazeera.net traceroute to aljazeera.net (213.30.180.219), 30 hops max, 38 byte packets 1 E19-RTR-2-E2.MIT.EDU (18.244.0.1) 0.459 ms 0.372 ms 0.362 ms 2 EXTERNAL-RTR-2-BACKBONE.MIT.EDU (18.168.0.27) 0.470 ms 0.445 ms 0.438 ms 3 p4-1.cambridge1-cr1.bbnplanet.net (4.1.80.29) 1.162 ms 0.825 ms 0.988 ms 4 p4-2.cambridge1-nbr1.bbnplanet.net (4.1.80.6) 0.907 ms 0.992 ms 0.893 ms 5 p5-0.cambridge1-nbr2.bbnplanet.net (4.0.1.110) 1.126 ms 1.052 ms 1.140 ms 6 so-4-2-0.bstnma1-nbr2.bbnplanet.net (4.0.2.249) 0.998 ms 1.145 ms 1.145 ms 7 p9-0.nycmny1-nbr2.bbnplanet.net (4.24.6.50) 7.161 ms 7.269 ms 7.041 ms 8 so-7-0-0.nycmny1-hcr3.bbnplanet.net (4.0.7.13) 7.389 ms 7.380 ms 7.464 ms 9 interconnect-eng.NewYork1.Level3.net (63.211.54.121) 7.453 ms 7.255 ms 7.524 ms 10 so-4-0-0.gar2.NewYork1.Level3.net (209.244.17.81) 7.488 ms so-4-0-0.gar1.NewYork1.Level3.net (209.244.17.73) 7.510 ms so-4-1-0.gar2.NewYork1.Level3.net (209.244.17.85) 8.414 ms 11 unknown.Level3.net (209.247.9.205) 7.755 ms 7.381 ms so-7-0-0.mp1.NewYork1.Level3.net (64.159.1.181) 7.513 ms 12 so-0-0-0.mp1.London1.Level3.net (212.187.128.157) 73.252 ms 73.321 ms 73.260 ms 13 so-1-0-0.mp1.Paris1.Level3.net (212.187.128.41) 86.229 ms 86.054 ms 85.886 ms 14 unknown.Level3.net (212.73.240.71) 86.283 ms 86.235 ms 86.132 ms 15 212.73.242.66 (212.73.242.66) 86.943 ms 87.274 ms 87.239 ms 16 213.30.129.210 (213.30.129.210) 101.833 ms 103.349 ms 101.809 ms 17 213.30.128.126 (213.30.128.126) 103.526 ms 104.286 ms 103.711 ms 18 * * *
RE: U.S. Drops 'E-Bomb' On Iraqi TV
Steve Schear [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: At 01:46 AM 3/28/2003 +1200, Peter Gutmann wrote: John Young [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Whether either of these work as bragged or are psyop mirages is worth betting an WMD Indian nickle on. It's a cool toy, but I can't see someone using a $1M e-bomb when a $1000 Mk.82 will do the same thing, especially if there's any chance it'll be captured intact by an enemy who can... hmm, there's a thought: According to Carlo a E-WMD can be constructed, by a knowledgeable person, in a home garage machine shop from parts costing $5000. This is the Pentagon we're talking about here. The spanner used to tighten the bolts costs $5000. (I've also been told that a Mk.82 wholesales for around US$250, so I guess we're being overcharged at NZ$1K. Maybe it's because we don't buy 'em in bulk). Peter.
Re: Al-Jazeera website [was: Re: U.S. Drops 'E-Bomb' On Iraqi TV]
Maybe someone should tell them about Spam Assassin. In this case, SpamAssassin would most likely bring the machine further down by eating all the RAM and CPU. It's likely that separation of mail and web services would be a wise move here; DNS MX records allow a comfortable way to achieve this.
RE: U.S. Drops 'E-Bomb' On Iraqi TV
On Fri, 28 Mar 2003, Sarad AV wrote: All this happening on the worlds greatest demcoracy. may be you read this news. The worlds greatest democracy is India. Over 500 million people vote in one election. In any case US military pow's are going to have a hard time and since U.S didnot give pow status to *suspected* Al-Queda/taliban militants captured in afghan war-no body is going to put pressure on iraq either. Yup, hypocrisy is the US philosophy. The US can break the rules, but nobody else can. Unfortunatly, the people who should be suffereing won't. Check out Robert Fisk at the Independent in UK for some secondary reports from Al-Jazeera. I don't think the US propaganda machine is going to hold up under the real images of kids with their heads blown open. Patience, persistence, truth, Dr. mike
Re: U.S. Drops 'E-Bomb' On Iraqi TV
On Thu, 27 Mar 2003, Gabriel Rocha wrote: I just checked out http://www.aljazeera.net/ and there is a big red US flag on the front, courtesy of the Freedom Cyber Force Militia... well, perhaps aljazeera needs better network people... It's definitly being jammed in Wisconsin - I get the error: www.aljazerra.net could not be found. Plese check the name and try again. Same error for .org and .com too - you'd think somebody would be spoofing them if nothing else. Info war at it's best :-) At least I can still pick up VoR on a good night. Patience, persistence, truth, Dr. mike
RE: U.S. Drops 'E-Bomb' On Iraqi TV
At 01:46 AM 3/28/03 +1200, Peter Gutmann wrote: It's a cool toy, but I can't see someone using a $1M e-bomb when a $1000 Mk.82 will do the same thing, especially if there's any chance it'll be captured intact by an enemy who can... hmm, there's a thought: Oh dear! Peter, these are *free* to the people who make and use them. As a mil researcher, one would be eager to try out one's new gizmos in the field. As would all the deskjockeys who $upported your project and expect to advance their career$ if it works. A explosive driven ebomb would act just like a regular bomb to anyone standing nearby, although all that wire would be rather strange shrapnel to a naif EOD person. Iraqis don't have time to dupe it, and the Russians, Chinese, etc. can make their own. Real reason not to give it a try, once you're willing to risk knocking out civilian TVs and spec-ops radios and phones, is the *opportunity cost*. That's one bomb-pod you can't use for a known reg'lar bomb, and you are after all spending time, fuel, and life-risk-credits on your sorties. --- ...our claim to be left in the unmolested enjoyment of vast and splendid possessions, mainly acquired by violence, largely maintained by force, often seems less reasonable to others than to us. -- Winston Churchill, January 1914
Re: U.S. Drops 'E-Bomb' On Iraqi TV
At 10:36 PM 3/26/03 -0800, Sarad AV wrote: there is a lot of self [fnord] imposed sensor ship in US on the war.The Us pows's shown on al-jazeera were not broadcasted over Us and those sites which had pictures of POW's were removed as unethical graphics on web pages. We should be faxing these images to random fax machines. As political speech, it cannot be regulated, including any requirement for a call-back number. --- Only YOU can prevent fire-fights. --Smokey the Forward Air Controller
Re: U.S. Drops 'E-Bomb' On Iraqi TV
at Thursday, March 27, 2003 6:36 AM, Sarad AV [EMAIL PROTECTED] was seen to say: there is a lot of self imposed sensor ship in US on the war.The Us pows's shown on al-jazeera were not broadcasted over Us and those sites which had pictures of POW's were removed as unethical graphics on web pages. May be the US itself might be stopping access to al-jazeera networks. It certainly sounds probable. All the US and UK coverage is being very carefully stage-managed - all reporters are embedded into units for a reason - they are permitted to film what they are told, when they are told, and striking out on your own (or using a uplink to upload raw news to the newsroom carries the death penalty - as the ITN crew found out. Having a raw source of news - particularly one that carries pictures of young children being pulled from the rubble minus their legs - cannot possibly be tolerated. That isn't to say *that* source isn't biassed as well - try finding pro-COW coverage, and there must be at least some of the pro-COW coverage that our major media puts out that isn't faked.
RE: U.S. Drops 'E-Bomb' On Iraqi TV
Gabriel Rocha[SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Thu, Mar 27, at 06:33AM, Mike Rosing wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ host www.aljazeera.net www.aljazeera.net has address 216.34.94.186 This is from the US, fyi. It also works (and even resolves to the same thing :) from other hosts outside the US) Really? I'm getting sent to dotster (a domain hoarding site) when I try to access this as http://216.34.94.186 Peter Trei
Re: U.S. Drops 'E-Bomb' On Iraqi TV
I just checked out http://www.aljazeera.net/ and there is a big red US flag on the front, courtesy of the Freedom Cyber Force Militia... well, perhaps aljazeera needs better network people...
RE: U.S. Drops 'E-Bomb' On Iraqi TV
This is from the US, fyi. It also works (and even resolves to the same thing :) from other hosts outside the US) Yup, I get it from the UK, though I didn't get it two and three days ago. URLs are all in English, though this may be normal. BTW, does anyone know about www.aljezeerah.info ? I've been getting my news from there since the start of the war, but I don't know what links it has with, say, www.aljazeera.net, since I never got there before. It's all in English, but I'm not sure about the actual affiliation and editorial line, if anyone can shed some light. -- Vincent Penquerc'h
RE: U.S. Drops 'E-Bomb' On Iraqi TV
On Thu, 27 Mar 2003, Vincent Penquerc'h wrote: Yup, I get it from the UK, though I didn't get it two and three days ago. URLs are all in English, though this may be normal. BTW, does anyone know about www.aljezeerah.info ? I've been getting my news from there since the start of the war, but I don't know what links it has with, say, www.aljazeera.net, since I never got there before. It's all in English, but I'm not sure about the actual affiliation and editorial line, if anyone can shed some light. It's definitly jammed in the US. I get 503 - out of resources error. Maybe you guys can set up a mirror that isn't jammed and the US can see it that way (at least until the feds catch wind of it). Patience, persistence, truth, Dr. mike
Re: U.S. Drops 'E-Bomb' On Iraqi TV
On Thu, 27 Mar 2003, 'Gabriel Rocha' wrote: Gotta contact exodus to find out whom they have alocated that subnet block... [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ whois -h whois.arin.net 216.34.94.186 [whois.arin.net] I can run that via telnet to my isp, and get the same response (good!) OrgName:Cable Wireless OrgID: EXCW Address:3300 Regency Pkwy City: Cary StateProv: NC PostalCode: 27511 Country:US Makes it easy for the US to control the info flow :-) I'll send these guys some e-mail and see if I get any response. OrgTechHandle: EIAA-ARIN OrgTechName: Exodus IP Address Administration OrgTechPhone: +1-888-239-6387 OrgTechEmail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] OrgTechHandle: GIAA-ARIN OrgTechName: Global IP Address Administration OrgTechPhone: +1-919-465-4096 OrgTechEmail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] The last one looks like the main one to contact. This should be interesting and fun :-) Patience, persistence, truth, Dr. mike
RE: U.S. Drops 'E-Bomb' On Iraqi TV
On Thu, 27 Mar 2003, Trei, Peter wrote: Gabriel Rocha[SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Thu, Mar 27, at 06:33AM, Mike Rosing wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ host www.aljazeera.net www.aljazeera.net has address 216.34.94.186 This is from the US, fyi. It also works (and even resolves to the same thing :) from other hosts outside the US) Really? I'm getting sent to dotster (a domain hoarding site) when I try to access this as http://216.34.94.186 I'm not a router guru, maybe somebody can explain these results: $ dig 216.34.94.186 ; DiG 9.2.0 216.34.94.186 ;; global options: printcmd ;; Got answer: ;; -HEADER- opcode: QUERY, status: NXDOMAIN, id: 2646 ;; flags: qr aa rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 0, AUTHORITY: 1, ADDITIONAL: 0 ;; QUESTION SECTION: ;216.34.94.186. IN A ;; AUTHORITY SECTION: . 86400 IN SOA A.ROOT-SERVERS.NET. NSTLD.VERISIGN-GRS.COM. 2003032700 1800 900 604800 86400 ;; Query time: 113 msec ;; SERVER: 128.104.20.18#53(128.104.20.18) ;; WHEN: Wed Mar 26 23:19:48 2003 ;; MSG SIZE rcvd: 106 $ host 216.34.94.186 186.94.34.216.in-addr.arpa is an alias for 186.160/27.94.34.216.in-addr.arpa. 186.160/27.94.34.216.in-addr.arpa domain name pointer redirect.dnsix.com. How do I chase this thing down to who actually owns it? Note I do get: $ host www.aljazeera.net www.aljazeera.net has address 216.34.94.186 So why the original error response if host can find it? Interesting! Patience, persistence, truth, Dr. mike
RE: U.S. Drops 'E-Bomb' On Iraqi TV
Thanks. One thing you should know - if you visit it, ip alone won't work. Add it to your hosts file as 207.150.192.12 www.aljazeerah.info (no quotes, on a line by itself) as the site wants host header names and the ip isn't enough. in unix it's /etc/hosts, in w2k it's %systemroot%\system32\drivers\etc\hosts in win9x it should be just c:\windows\hosts (not sure, don't care) --Kaos-Keraunos-Kybernetos--- + ^ + :NSA got $20Bil/year |Passwords are like underwear. You don't /|\ \|/ :and didn't stop 9-11|share them, you don't hang them on your/\|/\ --*--:Instead of rewarding|monitor, or under your keyboard, you \/|\/ /|\ :their failures, we |don't email them, or put them on a web \|/ + v + :should get refunds! |site, and you must change them very often. [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.sunder.net On Thu, 27 Mar 2003, Vincent Penquerc'h wrote: Got an ip for .info? I can't resolve that from here. 207.150.192.12 -- Vincent Penquerc'h
RE: U.S. Drops 'E-Bomb' On Iraqi TV
Connecting to www.aljazeera.net[216.34.94.186]:80... failed: Attempt to connect timed out without establishing a connection. Retrying. I get it again now, but... Strangely, Opera does reach it fast and all (though I suspect it's hitting a mirror though I explicitely refresh) but wget reached it though it waits indefinitely after the 200 OK. Maybe just overload due to heavy success (or script kiddie activity). I eventually got /index.html, and it's the Dotster page someone spoke of earlier ??? I'm starting to wonder whether Opera is using an IP it had cached earlier, whereas wget resolves anew and hits the new DNS records, which have changed since then... $ wget http://www.aljazeera.net/ --18:47:59-- http://www.aljazeera.net/ = `index.html' Resolving www.aljazeera.net... done. Connecting to www.aljazeera.net[216.34.94.186]:80... connected. HTTP request sent, awaiting response... 200 OK Length: unspecified [text/html] [ = ] 15,01512.45K/s 18:49:57 (12.45 KB/s) - Read error at byte 15015 (Connection reset by peer).Retr ying. --18:49:57-- http://www.aljazeera.net/ (try: 2) = `index.html' Connecting to www.aljazeera.net[216.34.94.186]:80... connected. HTTP request sent, awaiting response... 200 OK Length: unspecified [text/html] [ = ] 29,15330.58K/s 18:49:59 (30.58 KB/s) - `index.html' saved [29153] -- Vincent Penquerc'h
RE: U.S. Drops 'E-Bomb' On Iraqi TV
www.aljazeerah.info.3322IN A 207.150.192.12 On Thu, 27 Mar 2003, Sunder wrote: Got an ip for .info? I can't resolve that from here.
Re: U.S. Drops 'E-Bomb' On Iraqi TV
On Thu, 27 Mar 2003, Vincent Penquerc'h wrote:
Is it jammed world wide? You're in COW too. Any one from .nl or .de
or .fr who can pick it up still?
Still, www.aljazeerah.info is still accessible if you're feeling
so inclined. Odd though that the Arabic side is down but this one
stays up, if they're aiming for propaganda in their own countries,
mostly English speaking but not much Arabic speaking. Unless they
fear some kind of Arab community backlash from the images ?
I don't believe this is the same site. If the navigation bar weren't
enough to clue you in, perhaps the copyright statement would be:
2002-2003 Copyright \x{00A9} aljazeerah.info aljazeerah.us. All Rights Reserved.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Aljazeerah Information Center, P. O. Box 724, Dalton, GA 30720, USA
-j
--
Jamie Lawrence[EMAIL PROTECTED]
If we're going to be warned about terrorism, can't we be warned
by someone who makes us want to survive?
- Jon Stuart
RE: U.S. Drops 'E-Bomb' On Iraqi TV
There's no such thing as being jammed (flooded) in the US only or worldwide. Either it's being blocked by packet filters, or it's being flooded with too much traffic. If anyone sees a different traceroute - one that doesn't go through cw, then you may still be able to get to the site. Otherwise, it's got a single connection, and that's down. If you can see it from outside the US only, it's being filtered (i.e. blocked at a router or firewall), not jammed with traffic. If you look at the IP addresses it looks like it's connection is owned by cw as the last cw router is 216.34.64.x. So if it's blocked at cw either by firewall or by flooding, you won't be able to get it from anywhere. --Kaos-Keraunos-Kybernetos--- + ^ + :NSA got $20Bil/year |Passwords are like underwear. You don't /|\ \|/ :and didn't stop 9-11|share them, you don't hang them on your/\|/\ --*--:Instead of rewarding|monitor, or under your keyboard, you \/|\/ /|\ :their failures, we |don't email them, or put them on a web \|/ + v + :should get refunds! |site, and you must change them very often. [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.sunder.net On Thu, 27 Mar 2003, Mike Rosing wrote: On Thu, 27 Mar 2003, Vincent Penquerc'h wrote: Well, too late anyway, it seems... --17:37:47-- http://www.aljazeera.net/ = `www.aljazeera.net/index.html' Resolving www.aljazeera.net... done. Connecting to www.aljazeera.net[216.34.94.186]:80... failed: Attempt to connect timed out without establishing a connection. Retrying. [...] Is it jammed world wide? You're in COW too. Any one from .nl or .de or .fr who can pick it up still? Pretty good proof the scum in DC are afraid of propaganda that's not theirs. Patience, persistence, truth, Dr. mike
RE: U.S. Drops 'E-Bomb' On Iraqi TV
Got an ip for .info? I can't resolve that from here. --Kaos-Keraunos-Kybernetos--- + ^ + :NSA got $20Bil/year |Passwords are like underwear. You don't /|\ \|/ :and didn't stop 9-11|share them, you don't hang them on your/\|/\ --*--:Instead of rewarding|monitor, or under your keyboard, you \/|\/ /|\ :their failures, we |don't email them, or put them on a web \|/ + v + :should get refunds! |site, and you must change them very often. [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.sunder.net On Thu, 27 Mar 2003, Vincent Penquerc'h wrote: Still, www.aljazeerah.info is still accessible if you're feeling so inclined. Odd though that the Arabic side is down but this one stays up, if they're aiming for propaganda in their own countries, mostly English speaking but not much Arabic speaking. Unless they fear some kind of Arab community backlash from the images ?
Re: U.S. Drops 'E-Bomb' On Iraqi TV
For the little that I get, this is what I get out of a traceroute: 11 acr2-loopback.Seattle.cw.net (208.172.82.62) 79.920 ms 74.381 ms 88.037 ms 12 bhr2-pos-0-0.Tukwilase2.cw.net (208.172.81.222) 79.107 ms 83.846 ms 91.354 ms 13 * csr11-ve243.Tukwilase2.cw.net (216.34.64.147) 73.553 ms 81.541 ms 14 * * * 15 * * * I've found one DNS server claiming that this is the right ip for it: 216.34.94.186 --Kaos-Keraunos-Kybernetos--- + ^ + :NSA got $20Bil/year |Passwords are like underwear. You don't /|\ \|/ :and didn't stop 9-11|share them, you don't hang them on your/\|/\ --*--:Instead of rewarding|monitor, or under your keyboard, you \/|\/ /|\ :their failures, we |don't email them, or put them on a web \|/ + v + :should get refunds! |site, and you must change them very often. [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.sunder.net On Thu, 27 Mar 2003, Mike Rosing wrote: It's definitly being jammed in Wisconsin - I get the error: www.aljazerra.net could not be found. Plese check the name and try again. Same error for .org and .com too - you'd think somebody would be spoofing them if nothing else. Info war at it's best :-) At least I can still pick up VoR on a good night.
RE: U.S. Drops 'E-Bomb' On Iraqi TV
If anyone sees a different traceroute - one that doesn't go through cw, then you may still be able to get to the site. Otherwise, it's got a single connection, and that's down. Goes through, but beyond, it seems, from the UK. $ tracert www.aljazeera.net Tracing route to www.aljazeera.net [216.34.94.186] over a maximum of 30 hops: 1 10 ms * 10 ms 217.150.100.137 2 10 ms 10 ms 10 ms 217.150.97.4 3 10 ms 10 ms 10 ms 217.150.96.1 4 10 ms15 ms 10 ms har1-serial6-1-0.London.cw.net [166.63.166.33] 5 10 ms 10 ms 10 ms bcr2.London.cw.net [166.63.162.62] 616 ms16 ms31 ms bcr2-so-7-0-0.Thamesside.cw.net [166.63.209.205] 7 391 ms 390 ms 391 ms acr2-loopback.Seattle.cw.net [208.172.82.62] 8 * 391 ms 375 ms bhr2-pos-0-0.Tukwilase2.cw.net [208.172.81.222] 9 375 ms 407 ms * csr11-ve241.Tukwilase2.cw.net [216.34.64.42] 10 391 ms 406 ms 391 ms jerry.exodus.net [216.34.83.66] 11 407 ms * 391 ms redirect.dnsix.com [216.34.94.186] Trace complete. -- Vincent Penquerc'h
RE: U.S. Drops 'E-Bomb' On Iraqi TV
It's definitly jammed in the US. I get 503 - out of resources error. Maybe you guys can set up a mirror that isn't jammed and the US can see it that way (at least until the feds catch wind of it). Well, too late anyway, it seems... --17:37:47-- http://www.aljazeera.net/ = `www.aljazeera.net/index.html' Resolving www.aljazeera.net... done. Connecting to www.aljazeera.net[216.34.94.186]:80... failed: Attempt to connect timed out without establishing a connection. Retrying. --17:38:10-- http://www.aljazeera.net/ (try: 2) = `www.aljazeera.net/index.html' Connecting to www.aljazeera.net[216.34.94.186]:80... failed: Attempt to connect timed out without establishing a connection. Retrying. --17:38:33-- http://www.aljazeera.net/ (try: 3) = `www.aljazeera.net/index.html' Connecting to www.aljazeera.net[216.34.94.186]:80... failed: Attempt to connect timed out without establishing a connection. Retrying. -- Vincent Penquerc'h
RE: U.S. Drops 'E-Bomb' On Iraqi TV
This is the placeholder for domain aljazeera.info. If you see Yes, try with a h at the end. -- Vincent Penquerc'h
Re: U.S. Drops 'E-Bomb' On Iraqi TV
It may have been replaced, but earlier this morning when I heard it was hacked, I pulled it up and it had been replaced with an american flag redirecting the user to http://members.networld.com/freedom2003/index.sb and the message This broadcast was brought to you by: Freedom Cyber Force Militia GOD BLESS OUR TROOPS!!! fwiw.
Re: U.S. Drops 'E-Bomb' On Iraqi TV
I get that from www.aljazeera.ru. The cached pages on google come up with www.aljazeera.net not in the DNS, and the live pages go to the dotster. I did find a live feed that works, but it's in arabic :-( Also, the NYSE kicked al-jazeera reporters out of the exchange: Mar. 26, 2003. 01:00 AM http://www.thestar.com/images/star/nav/tts_spacer.gif?GXHC_gx_session_id_=48f6385cc9749078; Web site may be victim of hackers Only Al-Jazeera servers in U.S. hit NYSE bans network reporters from floor RACHEL ROSS TECHNOLOGY REPORTER It's been a difficult week for Al-Jazeera, the largest Arab satellite news network. Al-Jazeera's new English-language Web site (english.aljazeera.net) launched Monday, was flooded with Internet traffic. Whether that traffic came from hackers or was due to an abundance of interested readers is still unclear. But the net effect was the same: many Web surfers found they couldn't view the site yesterday. Two Al-Jazeera reporters also had their credentials revoked by the New York Stock Exchange. [] Looks like a lot more than just the US servers have been hit :-) Patience, persistence, truth, Dr. mike On Thu, 27 Mar 2003, Pete Mannix wrote: It may have been replaced, but earlier this morning when I heard it was hacked, I pulled it up and it had been replaced with an american flag redirecting the user to http://members.networld.com/freedom2003/index.sb and the message This broadcast was brought to you by: Freedom Cyber Force Militia GOD BLESS OUR TROOPS!!! fwiw.
Re: U.S. Drops 'E-Bomb' On Iraqi TV
At 1:32 AM +1200 on 3/28/03, Peter Gutmann wrote: It's also nothing like highly classified - google for flux compression generator. Not to be confused with a flux capacitor. hyuk! Cheers, RAH No matter where you go, there you are... -- - R. A. Hettinga mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED] The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation http://www.ibuc.com/ 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA ... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience. -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire'
RE: U.S. Drops 'E-Bomb' On Iraqi TV
On Thu, 27 Mar 2003, Vincent Penquerc'h wrote: Still, www.aljazeerah.info is still accessible if you're feeling so inclined. Odd though that the Arabic side is down but this one stays up, if they're aiming for propaganda in their own countries, mostly English speaking but not much Arabic speaking. Unless they fear some kind of Arab community backlash from the images ? Not in the US. I just get: This is the placeholder for domain aljazeera.info. If you see this page after uploading site content you probably have not replaced the index.html file. This page has been automatically generated by Server Administrator. If there's something they won't like, it's this: http://www.statewatch.org/news/2003/mar/16belg.htm I believe Kissinger is already avoiding France (and probably Spain), it'd be good if he was being chased up in more countries. Yeah, it'd be good if all US leaders got the same treatment :-) Patience, persistence, truth, Dr. mike
RE: U.S. Drops 'E-Bomb' On Iraqi TV
Is it jammed world wide? You're in COW too. Any one from .nl or .de or .fr who can pick it up still? Still, www.aljazeerah.info is still accessible if you're feeling so inclined. Odd though that the Arabic side is down but this one stays up, if they're aiming for propaganda in their own countries, mostly English speaking but not much Arabic speaking. Unless they fear some kind of Arab community backlash from the images ? Pretty good proof the scum in DC are afraid of propaganda that's not theirs. If there's something they won't like, it's this: http://www.statewatch.org/news/2003/mar/16belg.htm I believe Kissinger is already avoiding France (and probably Spain), it'd be good if he was being chased up in more countries. -- Vincent Penquerc'h
RE: U.S. Drops 'E-Bomb' On Iraqi TV
Got an ip for .info? I can't resolve that from here. 207.150.192.12 -- Vincent Penquerc'h
Re: CDR: RE: U.S. Drops 'E-Bomb' On Iraqi TV
Mike Rosing [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm not a router guru, maybe somebody can explain these results: $ dig 216.34.94.186 ; DiG 9.2.0 216.34.94.186 ;; global options: printcmd ;; Got answer: ;; -HEADER- opcode: QUERY, status: NXDOMAIN, id: 2646 ;; flags: qr aa rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 0, AUTHORITY: 1, ADDITIONAL: 0 ;; QUESTION SECTION: ;216.34.94.186. IN A ;; AUTHORITY SECTION: . 86400 IN SOA A.ROOT-SERVERS.NET. NSTLD.VERISIGN-GRS.COM. 2003032700 1800 900 604800 86400 ;; Query time: 113 msec ;; SERVER: 128.104.20.18#53(128.104.20.18) ;; WHEN: Wed Mar 26 23:19:48 2003 ;; MSG SIZE rcvd: 106 $ host 216.34.94.186 186.94.34.216.in-addr.arpa is an alias for 186.160/27.94.34.216.in-addr.arpa. 186.160/27.94.34.216.in-addr.arpa domain name pointer redirect.dnsix.com. How do I chase this thing down to who actually owns it? whois aljazeera.net? Registrant: Jazeera Space Channel TV station (ALJAZEERA2-DOM) P.O. Box 231234 Doha QA Domain Name: ALJAZEERA.NET Administrative Contact: AlaliAJ7476, MJ (HCSGDXPWTI) [EMAIL PROTECTED] Al Jazeera Space TV Station Po Box. 211234 Doha, QT 7476 QA +974 07 04 17761 +999 999 Technical Contact: VeriSign, Inc. (HOST-ORG)[EMAIL PROTECTED] VeriSign, Inc. 21355 Ridgetop Circle Dulles, VA 20166 US 1-888-642-9675 Record expires on 31-Aug-2010. Record created on 30-Aug-1996. Database last updated on 27-Mar-2003 14:33:52 EST. Domain servers in listed order: NS3.ALJAZEERA.NET213.30.180.218 ALJNS1SA.NAV-LINK.NET217.26.193.15 Do you want to look for the domain registrars, the people who own the nameservers, the people who own the netblocks the web site lives in, the people who own the netblocks the nameservers live in... ? It looks like, from below, the IP address is with dotster... Note I do get: $ host www.aljazeera.net www.aljazeera.net has address 216.34.94.186 So why the original error response if host can find it? Interesting! Because 'host' is doing magic that 'dig' presumes you don't want done. Try this instead of your dig command above: % dig -x 216.34.94.186 ; DiG 8.3 216.34.94.186 ;; res options: init recurs defnam dnsrch ;; got answer: ;; -HEADER- opcode: QUERY, status: NXDOMAIN, id: 2 ;; flags: qr aa rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 0, AUTHORITY: 0, ADDITIONAL: 0 ;; QUERY SECTION: ;; 216.34.94.186, type = A, class = IN ;; Total query time: 97 msec ;; FROM: removed to SERVER: default -- removed ;; WHEN: Thu Mar 27 14:34:42 2003 ;; MSG SIZE sent: 31 rcvd: 31 % dig -x 216.34.94.186 ; DiG 8.3 -x ;; res options: init recurs defnam dnsrch ;; got answer: ;; -HEADER- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 2 ;; flags: qr aa rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 1, AUTHORITY: 4, ADDITIONAL: 4 ;; QUERY SECTION: ;; 186.94.34.216.in-addr.arpa, type = ANY, class = IN ;; ANSWER SECTION: 186.94.34.216.in-addr.arpa. 1D IN CNAME 186.160/27.94.34.216.in-addr.arpa. ;; AUTHORITY SECTION: 94.34.216.in-addr.arpa. 1H IN NS dns02.exodus.net. 94.34.216.in-addr.arpa. 1H IN NS dns03.exodus.net. 94.34.216.in-addr.arpa. 1H IN NS dns04.exodus.net. 94.34.216.in-addr.arpa. 1H IN NS dns01.exodus.net. ;; ADDITIONAL SECTION: dns02.exodus.net. 21H IN A209.1.222.245 dns03.exodus.net. 21H IN A209.1.222.246 dns04.exodus.net. 21H IN A209.1.222.247 dns01.exodus.net. 21H IN A209.1.222.244 ;; Total query time: 236 msec ;; FROM: removed to SERVER: default -- removed ;; WHEN: Thu Mar 27 14:34:45 2003 ;; MSG SIZE sent: 44 rcvd: 249 (Remember, 216.34.94.186 when doing DNS lookups is actually 186.94.34.216.in-addr.arpa...) So we take a look at that CNAME... % dig any 186.160/27.94.34.216.in-addr.arpa. ; DiG 8.3 186.160/27.94.34.216.in-addr.arpa. any ;; res options: init recurs defnam dnsrch ;; got answer: ;; -HEADER- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 2 ;; flags: qr rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 1, AUTHORITY: 2, ADDITIONAL: 2 ;; QUERY SECTION: ;; 186.160/27.94.34.216.in-addr.arpa, type = ANY, class = IN ;; ANSWER SECTION: 186.160/27.94.34.216.in-addr.arpa. 23h57m3s IN PTR redirect.dnsix.com. ;; AUTHORITY SECTION: 160/27.94.34.216.in-addr.arpa. 1d9h19m32s IN NS ns1.dotster.com. 160/27.94.34.216.in-addr.arpa. 1d9h19m32s IN NS ns2.dotster.com. ;; ADDITIONAL SECTION: ns1.dotster.com.23h44m IN A 64.94.117.199 ns2.dotster.com.23h44m IN A 63.251.83.78 ;; Total query time: 1 msec ;; FROM: removed to SERVER: default -- removed ;; WHEN: Thu Mar 27 14:47:36 2003 ;; MSG SIZE sent: 51 rcvd: 159 And voila! We have what looks like a dnsix.com IP
Re: U.S. Drops 'E-Bomb' On Iraqi TV
At 6:59 AM -0800 3/27/03, Gabriel Rocha wrote: On Thu, Mar 27, at 06:33AM, Mike Rosing wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ host www.aljazeera.net www.aljazeera.net has address 216.34.94.186 This is from the US, fyi. It also works (and even resolves to the same thing :) from other hosts outside the US) I get some really interesting answers. (I do so like looking at myself): % dig @64.105.172.26 www.aljazeera.net ; DiG 8.3 @64.105.172.26 www.aljazeera.net ; (1 server found) ;; res options: init recurs defnam dnsrch ;; got answer: ;; -HEADER- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 4 ;; flags: qr aa rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 1, AUTHORITY: 4, ADDITIONAL: 4 ;; QUERY SECTION: ;; www.aljazeera.net, type = A, class = IN ;; ANSWER SECTION: www.aljazeera.net. 2M IN A 127.0.0.1 ;; AUTHORITY SECTION: aljazeera.net. 2M IN NSns1.mydomain.com. aljazeera.net. 2M IN NSns2.mydomain.com. aljazeera.net. 2M IN NSns3.mydomain.com. aljazeera.net. 2M IN NSns4.mydomain.com. ;; ADDITIONAL SECTION: ns1.mydomain.com. 30M IN A64.94.117.195 ns2.mydomain.com. 30M IN A216.52.121.228 ns3.mydomain.com. 30M IN A66.150.161.130 ns4.mydomain.com. 30M IN A63.251.83.74 ;; Total query time: 212 msec ;; FROM: G4.local. to SERVER: 64.105.172.26 64.105.172.26 ;; WHEN: Thu Mar 27 14:53:35 2003 ;; MSG SIZE sent: 35 rcvd: 199 - Bill Frantz | Due process for all| Periwinkle -- Consulting (408)356-8506 | used to be the | 16345 Englewood Ave. [EMAIL PROTECTED] | American way. | Los Gatos, CA 95032, USA
RE: U.S. Drops 'E-Bomb' On Iraqi TV
Sarad AV[SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: hi, it doesnt matter as long as Al-Jazeera is live and kicking and the camera's are rolling. The highly classified bomb creates a brief pulse of microwaves powerful enough to fry computers, blind radar, silence radios, trigger crippling power outages and disable the electronic ignitions in vehicles and aircraft. the existance of such a bomb was on indian news papers a week ago. Regards Sarath. It was also in Newsweek. It's existence is well known. What is not is it's construction, size, or effectiveness. Peter
RE: U.S. Drops 'E-Bomb' On Iraqi TV
Has anyone ever heard of that carbon filament soft bomb that's designed to spread wispy carbon filaments over power plants? I've even seen a photo of the aftermath of one of these things... From: Trei, Peter [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], 'Sarad AV' [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: U.S. Drops 'E-Bomb' On Iraqi TV Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2003 09:40:00 -0500 Sarad AV[SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: hi, it doesnt matter as long as Al-Jazeera is live and kicking and the camera's are rolling. The highly classified bomb creates a brief pulse of microwaves powerful enough to fry computers, blind radar, silence radios, trigger crippling power outages and disable the electronic ignitions in vehicles and aircraft. the existance of such a bomb was on indian news papers a week ago. Regards Sarath. It was also in Newsweek. It's existence is well known. What is not is it's construction, size, or effectiveness. Peter _
Re: U.S. Drops 'E-Bomb' On Iraqi TV
At 10:41 PM 3/25/03 -0500, R. A. Hettinga wrote: ...from the Leg-HERFing department... Cheers, RAH Who expects it was just a bomb-bomb, Jim. They came back with a bigger one, just now. Yep. The COW needs the TVs to broadcast our message. Also we don't trust the infiltrated spec-ops radios not to get toasted. And the cell phones are useful too. --- Ballet is not Lorentz invariant. It is choreographed so that dancers make simultaneous movements in the frame of the audience -Jack Wisdom Swimming in Spacetime _Science_ 21 Mar 03
Re: U.S. Drops 'E-Bomb' On Iraqi TV
It's now been changed to the following. Did you manage to save a copy you can forward back to the list? :) Baghdad Targets Under Fire March 26, 2003 Coalition forces struck Baghdad again Wednesday, hitting targets associated with Iraq's intelligence service and state television . and killing 14 people in a residential area, Iraq claimed. U.S. Central Command said it had no information on the Iraqi claim, but asserted again that it was using precision weapons aimed only at regime targets. We have a very, very deliberate process for targets. It takes into account all science. It takes into account all possibilities, Brig. Gen. Vincent Brooks said at a press conference at Central Command headquarters in Doha, Qatar. We only target things that have military significance. Meanwhile, some intelligence sources said a large contingent of Iraq's elite Republican Guard, including 1,000 vehicles, was headed toward U.S. troops in central Iraq. But U.S. Central Command denied any movement was seen. The area in question already has seen the heaviest fighting of the war. U.S. officials say American troops with the 7th Cavalry killed up to 500 Iraqi fighters Tuesday and Wednesday in fighting around the central Iraq city of Najaf. ...from the Leg-HERFing department... Cheers, RAH Who expects it was just a bomb-bomb, Jim. They came back with a bigger one, just now. --- http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/02/24/iraq/printable541815.shtml CBSNews.com: Print This Story U.S. Drops 'E-Bomb' On Iraqi TV March 25, 2003 The U.S. Air Force has hit Iraqi TV with an experimental electronmagetic pulse device called the E-Bomb in an attempt to knock it off the air and shut down Saddam Hussein's propaganda machine, CBS News Correspondent David Martin reports. The highly classified bomb creates a brief pulse of microwaves powerful enough to fry computers, blind radar, silence radios, trigger crippling power outages and disable the electronic ignitions in vehicles and aircraft. Iraqi satellite TV, which broadcasts 24 hours a day outside Iraq, went off the air around 4:30 a.m. local time (8:30 p.m. ET Tuesday). Iraq's domestic television service was not broadcasting at the time. Officially, the Pentagon does not acknowledge the weapon's existence. Asked about it at a March 5 news conference at the Pentagon, Gen. Tommy Franks said: 3I can't talk to you about that because I don't know anything about it.2 The use of the secret weapon came on a day that saw intense action on the battlefield. The Pentagon said the U.S. Seventh Cavalry killed between 150 and 500 Iraqis after being attacked by rocket-propelled grenades near An Najaf in central Iraq. There are no reported American casualties. In other major developments: snip... -- - R. A. Hettinga mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED] The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation http://www.ibuc.com/ 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA ... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience. -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire'
Re: U.S. Drops 'E-Bomb' On Iraqi TV
hi, it doesnt matter as long as Al-Jazeera is live and kicking and the camera's are rolling. The highly classified bomb creates a brief pulse of microwaves powerful enough to fry computers, blind radar, silence radios, trigger crippling power outages and disable the electronic ignitions in vehicles and aircraft. the existance of such a bomb was on indian news papers a week ago. Regards Sarath. --- R. A. Hettinga [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ...from the Leg-HERFing department... Cheers, RAH Who expects it was just a bomb-bomb, Jim. They came back with a bigger one, just now. --- http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/02/24/iraq/printable541815.shtml CBSNews.com: Print This Story U.S. Drops 'E-Bomb' On Iraqi TV March 25, 2003 The U.S. Air Force has hit Iraqi TV with an experimental electronmagetic pulse device called the E-Bomb in an attempt to knock it off the air and shut down Saddam Hussein's propaganda machine, CBS News Correspondent David Martin reports. The highly classified bomb creates a brief pulse of microwaves powerful enough to fry computers, blind radar, silence radios, trigger crippling power outages and disable the electronic ignitions in vehicles and aircraft. Iraqi satellite TV, which broadcasts 24 hours a day outside Iraq, went off the air around 4:30 a.m. local time (8:30 p.m. ET Tuesday). Iraq's domestic television service was not broadcasting at the time. Officially, the Pentagon does not acknowledge the weapon's existence. Asked about it at a March 5 news conference at the Pentagon, Gen. Tommy Franks said: 3I can't talk to you about that because I don't know anything about it.2 The use of the secret weapon came on a day that saw intense action on the battlefield. The Pentagon said the U.S. Seventh Cavalry killed between 150 and 500 Iraqis after being attacked by rocket-propelled grenades near An Najaf in central Iraq. There are no reported American casualties. In other major developments: snip... -- - R. A. Hettinga mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED] The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation http://www.ibuc.com/ 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA ... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience. -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire' __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Platinum - Watch CBS' NCAA March Madness, live on your desktop! http://platinum.yahoo.com
Re: U.S. Drops 'E-Bomb' On Iraqi TV
On Wed, Mar 26, 2003 at 03:24:01AM -0800, Sarad AV wrote: it doesnt matter as long as Al-Jazeera is live and kicking and the camera's are rolling. Yesterday morning I could get to english.aljazeera.net. As of yesterday afternoon, it has become unavailable. Supposedly they are victims of hackers but yesterday a traceroute from california stopped somewhere in Sprints' network in the US. This morning I can't even resolve their name. None of their listed nameservers will respond. Eric
RE: U.S. Drops 'E-Bomb' On Iraqi TV
Here's a diagram and after-use photos of the carbon filament bomb, as used in the 1999 FYU live weapons test: http://cryptome.org/blu114-yu.htm The e-bomb has been extensively covered since Australian Carlo Kopp published his description (invention?) of it: http://cryptome.org/ebomb.htm Whether either of these work as bragged or are psyop mirages is worth betting an WMD Indian nickle on. Not many US weapons can survive stripping away manufacturers' promo shielding, except by additional $75 billion add-ons. Don't tell that to the Marines or Al-Jezeera will not be able to e-bomb a Chuckie. What are those mad Englishman contraptions that hurl cows and pianos across the bog? Load up the $10,000 a pop dead bodies with American Type Culture Collection-bred biologicals and slingshot them to, Umm, humanitarian debarkation, MRE.
RE: U.S. Drops 'E-Bomb' On Iraqi TV
Why not load a POW or dead body with biologicals and return them to the UN for handing over to the US for return to a heroe's welcome, or to a hospital in Germany, emitting toxics to every caretaker, then on to a recruitment parade down Broadway and photo op at the Whitge House and the Pentagon to be bemedaled and hugged by Bush and Rummy and loving families and licking babes and backpatted by yellow-ribboned adorants, each of which then becomes a distributor of a weapon of mass infection. Manchurian Candidate, Typhoid Mary, Homeland Patriotism, sickening chickens sent home to roost and waft the good stuff, kiss me, I'm a Raqi vet. Or will every shrivelled dick and wrong turn pussy become a pariah, feared by homeland fat fucks as if a contaminated Nam Vet, Gulf War Syndromed to why you complaining asshole homeland unwelcome, hey, you miserable unlucky shit, here's a global map of Leper colonies, soft-called in the old days VA die-die hotels, depositories of wasted, homicidal soldiers, out of sight out of Wall Street, out of media ads. Outside of DC recently we saw a busload of angry, amputeed vets being bussed to a Civil War battlefield. Inside a patent-leathered naval officer was delivering a patriotic dog and pony about the glory of warfare, our valiant warriors overcoming the enemy. The officer and gentleman was being crooned over by whalebutts until the vets were wheelchaired in by their armless buddies, some sightless, some with faces you'd never kiss with pleasure. The spitshiner was left alone in splendid blues when the crowd turned attention to the savaged geeks. Mercilessly, the wretched vets made no response to the tut-tutters, scratched their nuts, spat on the carpet, blew farts, made attacking wheelies at the little ones. Fuck you all, one barked, and out they went, back onto a blue VA bus, helping each other abandone the cornpone battlefield, back to the VA living dead cemetaries which never makes the ad-pumped evening news. Fuck the military, fuck the asshole patriots, fuck the war-loving media, fuck memorials to fallen warriors, the battlefields of tourism grotesque. Up the murderous anger against those who've never seen combat: Cheney, Rumsfeld, Perle, Rowe, Bush, Allen Keys, David and Rush Limbaugh, Michael Reagan, Spencer Abraham, Elliot Abrams, Andrew Card, Paul Wolfowitz, John Ashcroft, Ted Olsen, Anthony Scalia, Ken Starr, Clarence Thomas, Lamar Alexander, Bob Barr, Gary Bauer, Jeb Bush, Tom Delay, Newt Gringrich, Rudy Guiliani, Phil Graham, Dennis Hastert, Jack Kemp, Joe Lieberman, Trent Lott, Dan Quail, Roger Ailes, Bob Bartley, Wolf Blitzer, Tom Clancy, Steve Forbes, Sean Hannity, Bill O'Reilly, George Will, Bill Bennett, Jerry Falwell, on and on, the pantheon of chickenhearted righteous motherfuckers, agents of evil empires.
RE: U.S. Drops 'E-Bomb' On Iraqi TV
At 09:40 AM 3/26/2003 -0500, Trei, Peter wrote: Sarad AV[SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: hi, it doesnt matter as long as Al-Jazeera is live and kicking and the camera's are rolling. The highly classified bomb creates a brief pulse of microwaves powerful enough to fry computers, blind radar, silence radios, trigger crippling power outages and disable the electronic ignitions in vehicles and aircraft. the existance of such a bomb was on indian news papers a week ago. Regards Sarath. It was also in Newsweek. It's existence is well known. What is not is it's construction, size, or effectiveness. A good place to start is here http://www.airpower.maxwell.af.mil/airchronicles/kopp/apjemp.html Carlo is one of the few truly knowledgeable people who's published much detail. Here's some other Carlo referenced material http://f-111.net/CarloKopp/ A few years back he and I discussed an idea I had for an inexpensive terrorist version of an EMP device. Instead of using explosives, the pulse compressor-microwave generator are powered via lightening. A radio storm detector combined with a ground-cloud charge detector control the launch of a large model rockets, which trail a wire spool, into the cloud above. If a discharge is initiated its channeled into the EMP HW. A system holding several rockets could easily fit in a 3ft cubed box and placed on a tall building or other location near a target which is sufficiently frequented by lightening storms. Carlo thought the idea technically practical but not too useful for terrorists who wish to control the timing of their events. steve
